What "rights" should gays be allowed to have?

[UberLutheran]

I vote other due to the slanting of the choices.

No, I do not think a gay couple should get the same benefits or incentives that real couples get. Legitimately married (in God's eyes) people get breaks and incentives because of the children.

Who is legitimately married in God's eyes?

The heterosexual man and woman, in the case where one of the partners verbally, emotionally and physically abuses the other?

The heterosexual man and woman who were married in a Protestant church?

The heterosexual man and woman, both of whom belong to non-Christian faiths and who were married by non-Christian clergy?

The heterosexual man and woman who have no intention of ever having children?

The heterosexual man and woman, both in their 70s, who are marrying for love and companionship and who are past the age of conceiving children?

The heterosexual man and woman who are both atheists and were married by a justice of the peace?

Since the "legitimate marriage (in God's eyes)" means that "people get breaks and incentives because of the children" should people who do not plan to have children, or cannot have children, or are Protestant Christians, or non-Christians, or atheists be considered truly "married"?

Answer that.

 

[UberLutheran]

People actually voted for 2 and 3??

Well...I guess they allowed them the right to exist
How Christian

I voted other...
As in they should have all the same rights as any other person...it shouldnt matter what one's sexuality is, get what I mean?

In fairness, the idea is to start out with the very basic right (the right to exist) and to vote that selection, and every succeeding selection until people choose to stop.

For instance, if one believes they should marry, they would start with selection number 2 and vote for ALL the selections up to and including marriage.

Unfortunately, I had 100 characters available to me to describe the poll and the methodology, so I had to do the best I could and hope that people figured out my intention! (100 characters isn't a lot to work with!)

 

[BigBadWlf]

I


God only blesses hetrosexual marrage.

Evidence please…

Or are you claiming to speak for God?

 

[BigBadWlf]

I vote other due to the slanting of the choices.

No, I do not think a gay couple should get the same benefits or incentives that real couples get.

Do you think interracial couples should not have the same rights and legal protections as “real” couples?

Legitimately married (in God's eyes) people get breaks and incentives because of the children.

So you are saying infertile heterosexual couples are not legitimately married

Discrimination against gays is their own doing.

So is discrimination against blacks also their own doing?

What about anti-Semitism…are Jews responsible for the discrimination they receive?

How does one's employer discover the sexuality of a homosexual ? Well, one way is the homosexual goes around telling everyone knowing full well what a distraction and disruption it is.

so wedding rings and pictures of kids is not a distraction when heterosexuals do it…and of course not a reason to discriminate against heterosexuals…just homosexuals.

Discrimination is discrimination no matter who it is directed against. You just justified employment discrimination against homosexuals but such discrimination is no different than if employers fired people because of skin color or religion.

 

[BigBadWlf]

the world changes, Gods word never changes

And this is why eating shellfish is still an abomination…because God doesn’t change.

And why shaving is a sin… because God doesn’t change

And why wearing clothing made of mixed fabrics is a sin… because God doesn’t change

And why slavery is now considered to be wrong… because God doesn’t change

And why Christians still engage in animal sacrifices… because God doesn’t change

 

[BigBadWlf]

All but 7 and 8!

Can you justify this discrimination?

 

[Polycarp1]

God does not recognize Gay marrage. Simple as that.
Gay marrage is a man-made concept.

I guess you're OK with the idea that He won't bless yours, then? You see, you've taken it on yourself to judge what He will and will not do, based on your inferences of what He thinks about gays and their lives and actions generally from condemnation of certain same-sex practices in Scripture. And as we all know, we're commanded not to assume His role and judge because He will judge us with the same measure by which we judge others.

Based on my study of Scripture, I believe that He does bless and honor the commitments of same-sex couples trying to live lives of integrity before Him. Based on the Scriptural premises I'm inferring from your stance, I'm assuming you would believe the opposite. However, neither of us knows His mind on the subject, only what we can conclude from the Bible. And we do have some explicit commandments about how to behave toward our neighbors and our brothers and sisters in Christ, which would, I think, include gay people.

 

[united4Peace]

In fairness, the idea is to start out with the very basic right (the right to exist) and to vote that selection, and every succeeding selection until people choose to stop.

For instance, if one believes they should marry, they would start with selection number 2 and vote for ALL the selections up to and including marriage.

Unfortunately, I had 100 characters available to me to describe the poll and the methodology, so I had to do the best I could and hope that people figured out my intention! (100 characters isn't a lot to work with!)

I know....
I was just floored that people would actually vote for 2 and 3, Im thinking they have got to be ignorant (poorly educated) which would explain their fear of homosexuals.

Though now the reason I did vote other is because there was no other way I could vote without being 100% fair in my mind.
I just believe in equal rights for all, regardless of sexuality, faith, race and so forth.

 

[Polycarp1]

You just like self-actualizing misery, don't you ?

Admit it.

Repent ? You are not repenting if you have no intention of ending sinful relationships.

Everyone has sins they are not aware of ? True.

But homosexual sex ? That's a stretch.

And you presuably have no intent to repent of standing in judgment over your fellow man based on what you add to what Scripture actually says, in the same manner as Jesus condemned the Pharisees for doing.

I presume, it being Easter season, you have taken communion since forming that view? That would, by what I remember of Catholic theology, constitute a mortal sin.

Looks like we all got some repentin' to do, eh?

 

[RMDY]

I'm just trying to get some of my points answered. I believe that there were and are flaws in your argument, and I'm pointing them out and giving you the opportunity to explain them. It's not twisting anything.
To answer your frankly off-topic questions, I would answer that I don't know. I don't pretend to have direct access to the mind of God, and I don't know what he blesses and doesn't bless. How someone can state with any certainty that he doesn't bless gay relationships is beyond me.
Jesus never talked about playing tennis. Is it wrong?
Leviticus also mentions how it's wrong to eat shellfish and wear clothing of mixed fibres. I'm pretty sure it allows slavery at some point, too.
There are translation issues with Paul.

Hey
Cheer up

I'm sorry if I offended you.

The reason I point leviticus out is because it lists sexual sins, which is talked about in the new testament.

 

[RMDY]

Who is legitimately married in God's eyes?

Search the scriptures for your answer.

(I just came from from a graveyard shift)---so tired....

 

[UberLutheran]

Search the scriptures for your answer.

(I just came from from a graveyard shift)---so tired....

I've done graveyard shifts, especially when when replacing a network backbone and/or rewiring a network. They're no fun.

Actually, I'd like a direct answer from you. Given the list I gave you, which relationships constitute "marriage in God's eyes"?

 

[Pogue]

Hey
Cheer up

I'm sorry if I offended you.

The reason I point leviticus out is because it lists sexual sins, which is talked about in the new testament.

I'm cheery, and was more generally frustrated than offended. No apology needed.